Want to know what health care plan the Senate is voting on? Get out the Ouija board

What do we know about the federal healthcare kickback-producing, wealth-redistributing, rights-trampling, mandated-health-insurance bill that the Senate is voting on today? I think it’s clear with Senator Rand Paul’s [R-KY] response to a reporter, “I think it’s kinda hard to make a determination if you don’t know what you’re proceeding to.” I apologize. I thought someone on Capitol Hill knew what they were doing today. My mistake. I am not even sure if it is an actual vote on the bill or a vote to debate the bill.

Some believe it is a version of the bill that passed in May. I really don’t care what version it was if it didn’t fully repeal Obamacare. From what I understand, the only version that “mostly” repealed Obamacare was the 2015 version. I don’t know whether this is supposed to be a really bad Laurel and Hardy movie or a heart-wrenching drama. There are so many memes running through my head …

As I understand it, being a simple citizen on the Left Coast, the Senate is expected to vote on debate. If McConnell gets 50 votes to proceed with debate, then the Senate begins considering amendments. Here is an amendment I might propose: Forget everything and send a reset button to all insurance providers. Well, at least that matches the levels of hilarity we are seeing in D.C. now.

Okay, in all sincerity, there are some serious problems. Obamacare tied any opposition into a precarious knot. In order for one thing to be changed – one piece to be cut – someone would lose coverage. We don’t want to be mean, though, right? Being mean isn’t really a concern for the Democrats. They pushed a whole set of mean regulations onto the backs of every working American. The Republicans in the Senate need to get over it. There is no nice way to rip this Band-Aid off the festering wound. The first amendment to the May bill: End all mandated individual and corporate coverage guidelines.

Ending all government mandated coverage items is the first big step. Is anyone going to lose coverage? No. Why would they? The government is simply stating that it is not mandating any coverage. With that amendment it is understood that there could be no fines levied by the IRS for not having the care. Okay, that wasn’t hard. What’s next? Oh, the millions already on subsidized healthcare. Next, amend the bill to audit those with subsidies to ensure they are supposed to be there.

The subsidized recipients will fall into 3 general groups: 1) fraud, 2) genuinely needy, 3) erroneously added to rolls. Deal with them as follows: 1) prison, 2) Medicaid, 3) temporary group coverage until they find the insurance they want (max two year program).

Okay. What’s next? Oh, people are going to lose insurance coverage? No. They are going to choose not to have coverage.

What about people with pre-existing conditions? Listen, we all have a pre-existing condition and I think it is a terrible practice for insurance companies to deny coverage for these people. But should the federal government really be in the business of telling companies how to do theirs’? From all the evidence I have seen, the fed is the last advisory committee I would listen to on good business models. Remember that “group coverage” idea I mentioned earlier? That could be a permanent program at the State level, administered by a provider of the State’s choosing, specifically for individuals with pre-existing conditions. And it could even have the Medicaid and Medicare members enrolled. Group plans are less expensive than individual plans. This seems like the most humane and Constitutional way to dismantle Obamacare and move on.

The most inhumane thing the Senate can do is to allow any version of Obamacare that mandates coverages. Not only is it unsustainable, but it encroaches on the individual’s right of choice. Obamacare was never about healthcare. It was about mandating all individuals have health insurance. I am simply baffled how the Democrats came to the conclusion that it was okay to tell people who had insurance already that it wasn’t good enough; this coming from the same entity that can’t separate abortion from actual women’s health, or determine the gender of an individual by physiology.

The bottom line is that the Bill is completely repeal-able without forcing anyone to “lose healthcare”. No one is going to lose healthcare. Doctors, bound by the Hippocratic Oath, will do what it takes to provide necessary care. Is there a debt incurred? Of course. But that doesn’t mean I am responsible for paying that person’s debt (this is called wealth redistribution). Healthcare is not an inalienable right which means the federal government should not treat it as one.

No Comments Yet

Leave a Reply

© 2017 The New Americana